@Bruce Wade GOP: *refuses to even hold hearings for Garland* Dems: *raise concerns about appointing a potential alcoholic rapist with anger issues to the court* GOP: oH HoW dArE yOu DiSrEsPeCt ThE PrOcEsS
@@kentaromiurafanaccount5727 That's probably because they didn't have an opportunity to, since there were no hearings. And also, there was no evidence for Garland. There was for Kavanaugh.
If you've watched the confirmation hearings of any supreme court justice like with Kentanji Onyika Brown Jackson then you'll realize that Senators on the Republican side like Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz, you'll realize that they weren't being kind and understanding towards her. They were mean and hurtful towards her.
This discussion is disheartening. The recalcitrant ignorance of some people is beyond me. I am a Chilean, my girlfriend is a white girl, and I really don't have anything against whites qua white. I can't tolerate injustice and defamation. Some people kept asking me if I was an "illegal Mexican." I am not; I've lived in this country for 20 years. Some people forget how minority groups have contributed to this nation: Asians, blacks, Latino, etc. But they choose to cling to a racist ideology.
The GOP. The Go Along, to Get Along party. The two parties are suppose to be a check system. One party proposes something stupid and the other party is suppose to stop them. That is not happening. But, this was a good show for the people, that the Senate put on.
Being a supreme court justice is definitely not for me at all. Can anyone imagine if the US President Republican or Democrat decided to nominate me to become the next supreme court justice. It would be a honor for me to accept it but the confirmation hearings would be intense and challenging and tremendous and overwhelming and senators on one side would question me in many ways. So I consider myself very fortunate that I'm not into that at all.
In form this is your argument: -Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong. -All of my friends are doing it. -A product sells very well. Therefore, the product is a good product. "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong."
...been reading your comments flyboy. They are excellent, but I think it caused the now silence on the thread here. Well, except for the sound of crickets!
she was nominated by a democratic president who believes in gay marriage and senator Grassley knew that so he was putting her in a messed up situation on purpose. Shes a very intelligent woman and senator grassley doesn't like democrats period so he was attacking her in an articulate way. thats all.
Your statement "He isn't a natural born citizen as the Constitution requires! Where is his certificate" is fallacious. It's appeal to ignorance. Look up the fallacy, might make you look less ignorant.
I think we will have to wail and see on how each sentor votes. But two of the sentors may not vote. Kennedy is not at 100% from his stroke and Byrd is in his 90s and time is catching up with him. So he may not be voting either. I got that from my congressman Jim McGovern.
Continue: They note that slavery dominated the secessionist declarations, speeches, and pamphlets. Nevins also points to the argument of Alexander Stephens, who disputed Toombs' claims about the severity of the Morrill tariff. Though initially a unionist, Stephens would later cite slavery as the "cornerstone" reason behind his support of the secessionist cause." So much for your truth Mr. dogma thick skull!
Senator Grassley , since u claim to represent , the American voters, ie We the peoples , & exercise power n influence in our name , incl duties n obligations of interrogating , h'err interviewing the Presidential nominees to the SC of the US , what if We the peoples were to directly exercise our powers , duties & obligations , for a change , instead of outsourcing , delegating all the onerous tasks to you , ? Aahhaa it looks like , our master's & lords , we the peoples are not happy n satisfied with the jobs done by their elected Senators /Congressmen . Alright , let's see what , We the peoples, wish to ask the Presidential nominees to the SCOTUS ...? Are u game Ms S Sotomayer ? By all means, Senator Grassley ,why not ...after all , what &for who are the 3 branches of the Constitutional democracy , meant to serve ? Let's begin , Mr Martin ... Ms S Sotomayer u've been motivated & inspired by Perry Mason , fiction law -mystery novels to join the legal profession isn't it...? Indeed that's a fact & truth. Yet I was always clear , since my child hood days when I learnt to read English language , abt being determined to occupy the bench , so to speak, rather than the bar ... Why's that Ms S Sotomayer ? For the simple reason , the Judge on the bench has the last , final word /say , pronouncing the verdict , once lawyer , Perry Mason finished his arguments & requested the Judge to deliver the verdict. And what abt the Jury members ? Don't they deliberate & arrive at a conclusion of acquittal or conviction ? Now that's a terrain that needs an elaborate discussion , Mr Martin. Is US the only country to have a trial by jury system ? The trial by Jury system was introduced by England's King John 1 , as he signed the famous Magna Carta documents in the first decade of 13th century ... While it's true that most of the countries , fmr colonies of the British Empire hv abolished the Jury trial system, it has been adopted by the US, the Canada, Australia , where it continues inspite of critics railing against the glaring flaws , incl the UK Why does it continue inspite of the glaring conspicuous flaws in the system, Ms S Sotomayer ? Well, in practice in the US only abt 4% of the criminal cases & 1 % of civil cases are decided by Jury trial system . And the rest ? Plea bargaining by the prosecution &:the defendant attorneys offering an option /choice of , a substantially reduced prison term or being let off in some cases , should they plead guilty .... To avoid the expensive , time consuming going thru the onerous process of jury selection, premptory challenges , etc etc .... What about Germany judicial system. Does it follow the jury trial system ? That's an interesting query Mr Martin... U remember the Munich Beer Putsch in 1924 ,vwhen the National Socialist party ie A Hitler's -Natzis failed couple attempt ? Yes that was in 1924 ....? Yes. A Hitler was arrested &:tried for treason & sentenced for a long term but released in 9 months. And incidentally the Jury trial system has been abolished a year before this trial ie in 1923 by the Chancellor Wilhelm Marx ...! They follow a system of having a mixee bench ie a man x of lay Judges & professional Judges & it seems to hv worked fine in Germany to date ... And what abt Russia ? Russia under the Czar Alexander II had introduced the trial by Jury system in the year 1864 , in an attempt to introduce democracy , abolish serfdom , when he released peasants from servitude ...The system was abolished by the Lenin's bolsheviks in 1917 , however it made a comeback in Russia in 1993 besides Spain in the year 1995... Wasn't Joseph Stalin accused of manipulating witnesses in a thuggery , hooliganism case in Moscow ? That was the notorious , Bank robbery case of 1907 by Lenin & Stalin & their comrades , in Tiflis , Georgia , which was described by them as Expropriation of the peoples monies from the Imperial Bank.... The 19th & 20 th century was a golden era for Bank heists across Europe / US incl Russia .... Soooh, in ur considered view is there any substantive difference in the Russian , trial by Jury system & the American , jury trial system... I'd rather refer that query to a Grand jury , Mr Martin....
Hi, Sophie is back. Ad hominem (latin for 'to the man'). You did not define truth in its entirety, but gave an incomplete theory that is not taken seriously anymore. So you get to call off the argument, convenient. And yes, you have dismissed my questions and keep erecting straw man arguments that are pathetic!
"According to economist and libertarian historian Thomas DiLorenzo, this tariff was the primary cause of the Civil War.[16] Most Civil War historians disagree. Allan Nevins and James M. McPherson downplay the significance of the tariff dispute, arguing that it was peripheral to the issue of slavery.
This woman has not answered one straight question. She contradicts herself back peddles or outright lies. If you care about gun rights, private property, right to life, objectivity, American Sovereignty and not being ruled by foreign law in the judiciary and the plain constitution and Declaration of Independence; call your United States Senator @1-202-224-3121 and demand they vote no to confirm Sotomayor. Good job Senator! Stick to your guns and keep ours.
@@johnzarcone1358 At last Kavanaugh knows what a woman is unlike the idiot that said she can’t answer the question because she’s not a biologist. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
How quickly civility can and have changed.
how times have changed
At least Obama didn’t nominate an alleged rapist.
@Bruce Wade GOP: *refuses to even hold hearings for Garland*
Dems: *raise concerns about appointing a potential alcoholic rapist with anger issues to the court*
GOP: oH HoW dArE yOu DiSrEsPeCt ThE PrOcEsS
@@koodscood3027 Republicans also didn't accuse Merrick Garland of being a gang rapist when he was a teenager.
@@kentaromiurafanaccount5727 That's probably because they didn't have an opportunity to, since there were no hearings. And also, there was no evidence for Garland. There was for Kavanaugh.
@Bruce Wade Republicans like to pick controversial candidates.
I love how dignified everything is. Everyone's polite with each other and even making some jokes. Wish that happened nowadays
You can thank Mitch McConnell for the extreme partisan divide with SC justices
If you've watched the confirmation hearings of any supreme court justice like with Kentanji Onyika Brown Jackson then you'll realize that Senators on the Republican side like Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz, you'll realize that they weren't being kind and understanding towards her. They were mean and hurtful towards her.
She is from The Bronx, if you do not know what you are talking about, then do not talk about it.
She rocked that scene! Fuck Chuck. Sorry, but,they banned me on line
Crazy how much he pushed back against gay marriage. He’s so full of hars
She’s gonna dance, bob and weave.
This discussion is disheartening. The recalcitrant ignorance of some people is beyond me. I am a Chilean, my girlfriend is a white girl, and I really don't have anything against whites qua white. I can't tolerate injustice and defamation. Some people kept asking me if I was an "illegal Mexican." I am not; I've lived in this country for 20 years. Some people forget how minority groups have contributed to this nation: Asians, blacks, Latino, etc. But they choose to cling to a racist ideology.
OK then. Lets get it on!
Talk is cheap and America is tired of the threats. It is time to put up or shut up.
The GOP. The Go Along, to Get Along party.
The two parties are suppose to be a check system. One party proposes something stupid and the other party is suppose to stop them. That is not happening.
But, this was a good show for the people, that the Senate put on.
Where was all this civility when Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were nominated?
Being a supreme court justice is definitely not for me at all. Can anyone imagine if the US President Republican or Democrat decided to nominate me to become the next supreme court justice. It would be a honor for me to accept it but the confirmation hearings would be intense and challenging and tremendous and overwhelming and senators on one side would question me in many ways. So I consider myself very fortunate that I'm not into that at all.
In form this is your argument:
-Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.
-All of my friends are doing it.
-A product sells very well. Therefore, the product is a good product.
"It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong."
u tell em sonia!!!!! after she said that a hispanic women can make a better decision then a white male mccain got pissed!!!!!!! On the news! xD
... but she's an American.
haha that was a great explanation. i'll join in haha
"Who as not lived that life" thats the qualifier of the Sotomayer's statement,GET IT?
...been reading your comments flyboy. They are excellent, but I think it caused the now silence on the thread here. Well, except for the sound of crickets!
Yes, but you said that she is from Puerto Rico, that's what you said in your own comment.
She is not puerto ericen her parents were she is born in the Bronx
wow i love all the debates going on.. i mean really it's quite interesting.. i jsut wish i knew wat was going on .. someone wanna fill me in?
You're gonna love 2020😂
lmao 🤣
let me see how can I skate around this question
she was nominated by a democratic president who believes in gay marriage and senator Grassley knew that so he was putting her in a messed up situation on purpose. Shes a very intelligent woman and senator grassley doesn't like democrats period so he was attacking her in an articulate way. thats all.
Actually Sonia has voted conservative 90% of the time accoding to RFK JR and Progressive talk sho host Mike Malloy says she is conservative.
I cannot help but note how respectfully the Republicans treat a Democratic nominee vs the treatment of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.
@SpringDreams2 yes I did. Compare this to Kamala's Kavanaugh inquisition.
@@golfwesty I mean Barrett was treated fairly actually. So was Gorsuch.
Compared to brett at least.
How the tables have turned. Look at how they treated Justice Jackson.
Marriage should also have both people literate in the same language (like English).
Bitch what
Just what we need on the supreme court, a flip-flopper who dodges questions
Hey Walt,
We better save a spot on the court for the three legged, homosexual, muslim, man/women too!
Your statement "He isn't a natural born citizen as the Constitution requires! Where is his certificate" is fallacious. It's appeal to ignorance. Look up the fallacy, might make you look less ignorant.
* Two wrongs do not make a right
I think we will have to wail and see on how each sentor votes. But two of the sentors may not vote. Kennedy is not at 100% from his stroke and Byrd is in his 90s and time is catching up with him. So he may not be voting either. I got that from my congressman Jim McGovern.
Continue:
They note that slavery dominated the secessionist declarations, speeches, and pamphlets. Nevins also points to the argument of Alexander Stephens, who disputed Toombs' claims about the severity of the Morrill tariff. Though initially a unionist, Stephens would later cite slavery as the "cornerstone" reason behind his support of the secessionist cause."
So much for your truth Mr. dogma thick skull!
Senator Grassley , since u claim to represent , the American voters, ie We the peoples , & exercise power n influence in our name , incl duties n obligations of interrogating , h'err interviewing the Presidential nominees to the SC of the US , what if We the peoples were to directly exercise our powers , duties & obligations , for a change , instead of outsourcing , delegating all the onerous tasks to you , ?
Aahhaa it looks like , our master's & lords , we the peoples are not happy n satisfied with the jobs done by their elected Senators /Congressmen .
Alright , let's see what , We the peoples, wish to ask the Presidential nominees to the SCOTUS ...?
Are u game Ms S Sotomayer ?
By all means, Senator Grassley ,why not ...after all , what &for who are the 3 branches of the Constitutional democracy , meant to serve ?
Let's begin , Mr Martin ...
Ms S Sotomayer u've been motivated & inspired by Perry Mason , fiction law -mystery novels to join the legal profession isn't it...?
Indeed that's a fact & truth. Yet I was always clear , since my child hood days when I learnt to read English language , abt being determined to occupy the bench , so to speak, rather than the bar ...
Why's that Ms S Sotomayer ?
For the simple reason , the Judge on the bench has the last , final word /say , pronouncing the verdict , once lawyer , Perry Mason finished his arguments & requested the Judge to deliver the verdict.
And what abt the Jury members ?
Don't they deliberate & arrive at a conclusion of acquittal or conviction ?
Now that's a terrain that needs an elaborate discussion , Mr Martin.
Is US the only country to have a trial by jury system ?
The trial by Jury system was introduced by England's King John 1 , as he signed the famous Magna Carta documents in the first decade of 13th century ...
While it's true that most of the countries , fmr colonies of the British Empire hv abolished the Jury trial system, it has been adopted by the US, the Canada, Australia , where it continues inspite of critics railing against the glaring flaws , incl the UK
Why does it continue inspite of the glaring conspicuous flaws in the system, Ms S Sotomayer ?
Well, in practice in the US only abt 4% of the criminal cases & 1 % of civil cases are decided by Jury trial system .
And the rest ?
Plea bargaining by the prosecution &:the defendant attorneys offering an option /choice of , a substantially reduced prison term or being let off in some cases , should they plead guilty .... To avoid the expensive , time consuming going thru the onerous process of jury selection, premptory challenges , etc etc ....
What about Germany judicial system. Does it follow the jury trial system ?
That's an interesting query Mr Martin...
U remember the Munich Beer Putsch in 1924 ,vwhen the National Socialist party ie A Hitler's -Natzis failed couple attempt ?
Yes that was in 1924 ....?
Yes. A Hitler was arrested &:tried for treason & sentenced for a long term but released in 9 months. And incidentally the Jury trial system has been abolished a year before this trial ie in 1923 by the Chancellor Wilhelm Marx ...!
They follow a system of having a mixee bench ie a man x of lay Judges & professional Judges & it seems to hv worked fine in Germany to date ...
And what abt Russia ?
Russia under the Czar Alexander II had introduced the trial by Jury system in the year 1864 , in an attempt to introduce democracy , abolish serfdom , when he released peasants from servitude ...The system was abolished by the Lenin's bolsheviks in 1917 , however it made a comeback in Russia in 1993 besides Spain in the year 1995...
Wasn't Joseph Stalin accused of manipulating witnesses in a thuggery , hooliganism case in Moscow ?
That was the notorious , Bank robbery case of 1907 by Lenin & Stalin & their comrades , in Tiflis , Georgia , which was described by them as Expropriation of the peoples monies from the Imperial Bank....
The 19th & 20 th century was a golden era for Bank heists across Europe / US incl Russia ....
Soooh, in ur considered view is there any substantive difference in the Russian , trial by Jury system & the American , jury trial system...
I'd rather refer that query to a Grand jury , Mr Martin....
And you might have to get out of Ranch Land to know what "truth" is. You could not handle the question. ha ha. Mr pseudo historian!
Hi, Sophie is back. Ad hominem (latin for 'to the man'). You did not define truth in its entirety, but gave an incomplete theory that is not taken seriously anymore. So you get to call off the argument, convenient. And yes, you have dismissed my questions and keep erecting straw man arguments that are pathetic!
@YLEANA923 we don't puerto rico as a state. no no no.
Define socialism. And please explain what's so terribly wrong with it.
"According to economist and libertarian historian Thomas DiLorenzo, this tariff was the primary cause of the Civil War.[16] Most Civil War historians disagree. Allan Nevins and James M. McPherson downplay the significance of the tariff dispute, arguing that it was peripheral to the issue of slavery.
This woman has not answered one straight question. She contradicts herself back peddles or outright lies. If you care about gun rights, private property, right to life, objectivity, American Sovereignty and not being ruled by foreign law in the judiciary and the plain constitution and Declaration of Independence; call your United States Senator @1-202-224-3121 and demand they vote no to confirm Sotomayor. Good job Senator! Stick to your guns and keep ours.
I bet you didn’t feel this way with Kavanaugh avoiding every question 🤣
@@johnzarcone1358 At last Kavanaugh knows what a woman is unlike the idiot that said she can’t answer the question because she’s not a biologist. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
damn puerto rican cleaning lady got nominated hahaha